I enabled "“Show Language setting” in “Advanced settings”, but when i selet de_DE in the admin panel, nothing changes. And how to set the language for UCP, it’s not intended to do it on a per user basis, is it?
It doesnt even help if i set the “Default language” to de_DE
Affects Version/s: 13
Asterisk Version: 13.8.0
Distro: Self Install Ubuntu
Distro Version: 14.04
de_DE has no translations. So of course nothing would change.
And to participate in completing the translation, i really have to sign and email this form provided on/for weblate.freepbx.org?
@ladiko From the looks of it weblate is a third party service that FreePBX is using for translations. So the registration process is Weblate’s not FreePBX’s.
@tm1000 Am I correct on this?
I refer to this wiki entry http://wiki.freepbx.org/display/DC/Translating+FreePBX+with+Weblate which asks me to email a filled and signed “Code Submissions Agreement” PDF document to [email protected] in order to “to help translate FreePBX into your language”. To me, it feels a little bit overkill to sign a contract to add some strings which wouldn’t even consider getting called a “code submission”.
I guess a normal registration with the same “general terms and conditions” would be sufficient, but that’s my point of view.
Anything that ends up in the distributed code base including strings require a CSA
Including the agreement in the registration process isnt sufficient? Does this also apply to the linux kernel or OpenOffice?
Whatever, i will sign it then.
Yes and Yes. ( http://wiki.freepbx.org/display/FOP/Code+License+Agreement )
In the Linux kernel project patches are submitted to a special mailing list. Each patch must have the CLA text appended to the end of the submission email.
If you would like to submit significant patches for Apache OpenOffice, please fill out and submit the Apache Individual Contributor License Agreement CLA. If you want to learn more, please check the License FAQ. Here is a list of people who have signed the Apache CLA.
While the CLA seems like overkill, it really is intended to protect the folks that can’t protect themselves. I sent in some patched for AsteriskInfo to read and understand the output from Chan-SCCP-B (which I need to revisit too). Even though the changes weren’t added, these folks needed the agreement.
It isn’t actually the agreement that messed me up - it was the signature process. A fillable PDF with a signature service link would have made the process a lot simpler.
So @cynjut better pointer out what i mean. The agreement itself is not the issue but the way to do it (print,sign,scan,email).
I have adobe reader. It’s free online. I open it in Adobe Reader. I select “sign & fill” it will make a signature for you. I stamp this signature on any and all documents that are pdfs. I bought my home this way. I fill out health forms this way. The same thing can be done with the our CLA